tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/psychopath-18990/articlesPsychopath – The Conversation2018-01-28T18:08:03Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/875212018-01-28T18:08:03Z2018-01-28T18:08:03ZWhy the difficult person at work probably isn't a psychopath<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/203343/original/file-20180124-107974-1fdpuus.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Our workplace and work processes may be contributing to stress and bad behaviour.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>As workplaces become <a href="https://www.healthandsafetyatwork.com/mental-injury">increasingly</a> difficult and damaging environments, there are plenty of <a href="https://hbr.org/product/how-to-work-with-toxic-colleagues-hbr-onpoint-magazine/OPFA16-MAG-ENG">articles</a> and <a href="http://sweetpoison.shop033.com/p/9265127/taming-toxic-people.html">books</a> on dealing with “psychopaths” among your colleagues. </p>
<p>But psychopathy is <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wicked-deeds/201610/diagnosing-psychopathy">heavily contested</a> as a diagnostic category. And labelling a coworker a psychopath fails to account for how our workplaces can encourage bad behaviour.</p>
<p>From an “<a href="https://alwaysonculture.wordpress.com/">always on</a>” work culture to badly designed work practices, there are many reasons why a colleague could be behaving badly. This is partly why clinicians are <a href="https://www.psychiatry.org/news-room/apa-blogs/apa-blog/2016/08/the-goldwater-rule">prohibited</a> from diagnosing someone from afar - there may be many other factors influencing the behaviour.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="http://theconversation.com/psychopaths-versus-sociopaths-what-is-the-difference-45047">Psychopaths versus sociopaths: what is the difference?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The research on criminal psychopathy is <a href="http://www.bmj.com/content/345/bmj.e4692">based on thousands of cases</a> and involves statistical prediction of future actions based on these cases. The <a href="https://hbr.org/product/how-to-work-with-toxic-colleagues-hbr-onpoint-magazine/OPFA16-MAG-ENG">articles</a> that set out how to tell if your boss is a psychopath simply do not have the same evidence base. </p>
<p>Of the <a href="http://www.hare.org/scales/pclr.html">20 criteria</a> used to assess criminal psychopathy, many do not translate to the workplace (<a href="http://www.hogrefe.co.uk/psychopathic-personality-inventory-revised-ppi-r.html">other measures</a> have not been tested in work environments either). </p>
<h2>What about the workplace?</h2>
<p>As we have seen in recent sexual harassment scandals in <a href="https://theconversation.com/targeting-hidden-roots-of-workplace-harassment-is-key-to-fulfilling-oprahs-promise-to-girls-89908">media</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/taxpayers-are-subsidizing-hush-money-for-sexual-harassment-and-assault-86451">politics</a>, when workplaces don’t punish employees for unacceptable or harmful behaviour <a href="https://www.professionalstandards.org.uk/docs/default-source/publications/research-paper/antecedents-and-processes-of-professional-misconduct-in-uk-health-and-social-care.pdf?sfvrsn=8">it gives tacit permission</a>, in effect encouraging it to continue.</p>
<p>Individuals behaving badly are often oblivious to the impact they are having, and so without proper sanctions and containment remain unaware of the need to self-correct. But there are also specific aspects of our workplaces that may contribute to such problematic behaviour.</p>
<p>People’s personalities <a href="https://digest.bps.org.uk/2018/01/09/new-insights-into-lifetime-personality-change-from-meta-study-featuring-50000-participants/">aren’t fixed</a>, which means that some human resources tools, such as testing for “<a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/basics/emotional-intelligence">emotional intelligence</a>” (also known as EQ), may actually incentivise people to become more skilful at manipulating others’ emotions.</p>
<p>If someone is hired or promoted because they are very good at impression management and manipulation, they are likely to be very effective at making their managers believe they are doing a good job while also bullying their peers and subordinates.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="http://theconversation.com/emotionally-intelligent-employees-may-come-with-a-dark-side-manipulation-55942">Emotionally intelligent employees may come with a dark side – manipulation</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/good-work-design">Badly designed</a> workplaces, including excessive demands, poor physical environment, unfair practices and a lack of social support, <a href="https://workfamily.sas.upenn.edu/wfrn-repo/object/pt3yu38m2ae8vj2t">can produce</a> stress in employees.</p>
<p>For example, ill-conceived human resources processes, including performance management, <a href="http://www.hrmagazine.co.uk/article-details/competitive-hr-practices-good-incentive-or-a-poisoned-chalice">can undermine</a> social relations. </p>
<p>As a result, coworkers’ coping strategies (including changing the way we think about a situation, using humour, or focusing on solving problems) <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1986-19792-001">become overwhelmed</a>. This leaves them less able to attend to the day-to-day normal pressures of work, and to regulate their own social behaviours effectively. </p>
<p>In other words, bad behaviour in the workplace could be linked to fatigue, rather than to an aspect of a person’s character. </p>
<p>Distress caused by difficult social contexts <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5534210">can also lead to “dissociation”</a>. Dissociation is a self-protective mechanism that enables people to cut themselves off from their feelings of distress. But it can be experienced by others as coldness or a lack of empathy.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="http://theconversation.com/understanding-others-feelings-what-is-empathy-and-why-do-we-need-it-68494">Understanding others' feelings: what is empathy and why do we need it?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Instead of miscategorising these distressed people as psychopathic, we need to <a href="https://www.healthandsafetyatwork.com/mental-injury">better understand and recognise</a> early indicators of reactions that need care.</p>
<p>To be accurately used in a workplace, the term “psychopathy” would require collecting data on thousands of cases of employees and examining variables that predict, for example, bullying, harassment, fraud, and other counterproductive work behaviours. This research <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bsl.925/abstract">does exist</a>, but it is preliminary and needs replication with much larger samples.</p>
<p>But more profoundly, this distracts us from what we should be doing: making our workplaces better places to be. This will come from careful attention to the way that structures and practices feed unfairness and bring out the worst in us. </p>
<p>Instead of developing new ways of scapegoating each other with psychological concepts, we need to create environments that <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29274614">take care of our need to belong</a> and <a href="https://www.whatworkswellbeing.org/">to be appreciated</a> for our contributions.</p>
<p>And finally, if you are really drawn to labelling a colleague a psychopath, you should perhaps also consider the question “is it me?”. There is <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0146167214529800">substantial psychological evidence</a> that judgement about the actions of others are usually harsher than our judgement of our own actions - even when they are the same actions. </p>
<p>Labelling someone a psychopath makes the issue about the individual, rather than focusing on what the organisational factors are that are contributing to the behaviour.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87521/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joanna Wilde has written representing both the British Psychological Society and Council for Work and Health - in a voluntary capacity so no financial interest. Both invested in the creation of healthy workplaces which is aligned with the theme of the article currently in production.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Katarina Fritzon and Rosalind Searle do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It's tempting to think that difficult coworker might be a psychopath, but this just distracts us from the difficult work of making our workplaces better places to be.Katarina Fritzon, Associate Professor of Psychology, Bond UniversityJoanna Wilde, Industrial Fellowship, Aston UniversityRosalind Searle, Professor of HRM and organisational Psychology, University of GlasgowLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/842002017-10-31T00:46:33Z2017-10-31T00:46:33ZWomen can be psychopaths too, in ways more subtle but just as dangerous<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189706/original/file-20171011-2024-wfpf1a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Behavioural differences in female psychopaths could cause them to slip under society’s radar.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Hear the word psychopath and most of us think of violent, dominant men. There are lots of male psychopathic monsters from movies to illustrate this point. Think Alex in A Clockwork Orange, or Patrick Bateman in American Psycho.</p>
<p>But we do have some female examples: Annie Wilkes in Misery, and who could forget Alex Forrest’s bunny-boiling character in Fatal Attraction? These frightening fictional femme fatales stay with us – I’ve heard the term “bunny boiler” used to signify a woman behaving irrationally and violently – but they are unusual. We largely expect psychopaths to be men.</p>
<p>Research indicates <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14999013.2014.951105">there are likely</a> to be fewer female psychopaths than male. This may well be true. However, a compounding factor leading to the underestimation of the true occurrence rate of psychopathy in women could be behavioural differences that cause them to slip under society’s radar. This is important to acknowledge as female psychopaths can be just as dangerous as their male counterparts.</p>
<h2>What is psychopathy?</h2>
<p>Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterised by a number of abnormal behavioural traits and emotional responses. These include lack of empathy, guilt or remorse, and being manipulative and deceitful. People with psychopathy are often irresponsible and have a disregard for laws or social conventions.</p>
<p>Psychopaths often get away with these behaviours because they can be superficially quite charming. They are true observers of human behaviour, often <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40806-015-0012-x">being able to mimic</a> love, fear, remorse and other emotions well enough to go undetected. </p>
<p>Current thinking suggests psychopaths’ behaviour patterns result from variations in the structure of their brains at birth. A <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170705123121.htm">recent study</a> from Harvard University indicated their brains are wired in a way that can lead to violent or dangerous actions. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191563/original/file-20171024-20397-1yt8qwp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191563/original/file-20171024-20397-1yt8qwp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Psychopaths, like Patrick Bateman in American Psycho, are keen observers of the human condition and can mimic normal behaviour.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/mediaviewer/rm1804592384">Am Psycho Productions Edward R. Pressman Film Lions Gate Films, Muse Productions, P.P.S. Films, Quadra Entertainment, Universal Pictures</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Researchers used MRI scans to determine if activity and connections between areas of the brain associated with impulsivity and assessing the value of choices differed between those who scored highly for psychopathy and those who didn’t. The scans showed psychopaths make more short-sighted, impulsive decisions based on short-term gain, when compared to non-psychopaths, and that it is the structure of their brains that leads them to make these kinds of poor decisions. </p>
<p>Add this to their lack of empathy and it means if violence or dangerous behaviour will help a psychopath achieve a short-term goal, that is the path they will take. There is also <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2933872/">evidence genetics</a> are at least partly responsible for the development of psychopathic traits. In essence, psychopaths are born, not made.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="http://theconversation.com/psychopaths-versus-sociopaths-what-is-the-difference-45047">Psychopaths versus sociopaths: what is the difference?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Case studies</h2>
<p>Certain case studies show how women psychopaths present in the real world. “Amy” is a 20-year-old female <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14999013.2012.746755">serving a life sentence</a> for murder. She has been diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder with psychopathic traits. </p>
<p>Amy fits the description of having extreme psychopathic tendencies. She was showing antisocial behaviour in her teens, including running away from home and engaging in substance abuse. Before her conviction for murder, Amy had numerous convictions for fraud and assault. </p>
<p>The authors who assessed her case described Amy as deceitful and boastful, with a strong sense of self-entitlement. She was also described as having an extreme lack of empathy and remorse, while taking no responsibility for her actions. </p>
<p>Amy is physically and verbally violent to those around her, preying on vulnerable prisoners through bullying behaviours. Perhaps most striking is that Amy is noted to be very domineering, predominantly seeking power and control over others, sometimes using sexual charm to get what she wants. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191565/original/file-20171024-30565-1mnafiz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191565/original/file-20171024-30565-1mnafiz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Female psychopaths seem to be more hidden than their male counterparts.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Female psychopaths</h2>
<p>Research, limited though it is, suggests female psychopaths are manipulative and controlling, cunning, deceitful, don’t take responsibility for their actions, are exploitative and, of course, they lack empathy. Studies of incarcerated women suggest psychopathic females <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14999013.2014.951105">commit crimes at a younger age</a> compared to women without psychopathic traits. </p>
<p>They can have a history of being bullied and their behavioural traits <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-00292-006">tend to develop</a> (or at least express themselves) in their teenage years.</p>
<p>Female psychopaths commit crimes across multiple categories – robbery, drug crimes, assault. Other female inmates largely have only one offence type in their history. And psychopathic offenders’ crimes are more often motivated by power, dominance or personal gain than for non-psychopathic females. Female psychopaths are also <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-00292-006">more likely</a> to repeat-offend than those without psychopathic tendencies.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="http://theconversation.com/understanding-others-feelings-what-is-empathy-and-why-do-we-need-it-68494">Understanding others' feelings: what is empathy and why do we need it?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Many of these traits apply to male psychopaths too. But there are differences. In terms of occurrence rates, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3379858/">studies show</a> female inmates with psychopathy make up 11-17% of the overall prison population, compared to their male counterparts at 25-30%. </p>
<p>This may be because female psychopaths are likely to be more <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/14999013.2014.951105">relationally or verbally aggressive</a> than physically violent, and therefore commit less violent crimes than male psychopaths. This might help explain the initially surprising fact that women with psychopathy are found to be less likely to commit murder than non-psychopathic women.</p>
<p>Female psychopaths can also be <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=LSiBsdxcGigC&amp;pg=PA175&amp;lpg=PA175&amp;dq=hare+parasitic+lifestyle&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=noR2Be9f-V&amp;sig=5eueM48iI3ssLNgQk_yK0F62HOc&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiQ2dTB3oXXAhXEX5QKHemFDqEQ6AEIMTAC#v=onepage&amp;q=hare%20parasitic%20lifestyle&amp;f=false">jealous and parasitic</a>, meaning they feel entitled to live off other people, using threat and coercion to get support. </p>
<p>So, while female psychopaths are not all like Glenn Close’s character in Fatal Attraction, they certainly exist and can be as violent, cunning and calculated as their male counterparts. But they more often express their psychopathy in more covert and manipulative ways, meaning their true natures are rarely identified.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84200/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Xanthe Mallett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>While research indicates there are likely to be fewer female psychopaths than male, this may be because their traits are less visible than their male counterparts.Xanthe Mallett, Forensic Criminologist, University of NewcastleLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/558942016-04-28T21:52:44Z2016-04-28T21:52:44ZDemolition: a confused film about confusing emotions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120352/original/image-20160427-30953-1oq8nsq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Fox</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A tragic car accident. Investment banker Davis (Jake Gyllenhaal) emerges from the smash unscathed. His wife Julia (Heather Lind), however, is killed. Davis appears to be totally unable to feel anything about this event. So starts Demolition, a new film that – researcher of emotions as I am – I eagerly went to see.</p>
<p>A rush of telltale signs seems to signal a variety of emotional problems in Davis. These are problems that have occupied psychiatrists, psychologists, counsellors and social workers throughout the 20th century. I lapped these up, thinking Davis was slowly being revealed as a classic psychopath. An obvious disregard for others. Obsessing with small slights, like his peanut M&amp;Ms failing to drop from a vending machine. Seemingly pointless lies to strangers on the train to work. Pulling the emergency cord of the train to avoid having to give an emotionally significant response. Practising crying in the mirror at his wife’s wake.</p>
<p>At this point I was sure. He admits to never having loved his wife, claiming that marrying her was an easy thing to do. He’s an investment banker, fitting today’s vision of the rich, charming, empathy-free psychopath – think <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0144084/">American Psycho</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120353/original/image-20160427-30982-ut7vaa.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A banker – surely psychopathic?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Fox</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What is a psychopath?</h2>
<p>Psychopathy became a prominent issue in Britain and America during the 20th century. The concept was imported to British psychiatry from America by David Kennedy Henderson, an Edinburgh psychiatrist.</p>
<p>Concerns with juvenile delinquency and “anti-social behaviour” brought forward the figure of an easily angered young man, drifting between jobs, with grandiose ideas, a chip on his shoulder and an inability to understand why he wasn’t as successful as he thinks he should be. The Royal Medico-Psychological Association <a href="http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/usefulresources/thecollegearchives.aspx">defined</a> psychopaths in the 1950s as people with a “persistent anti-social mode of conduct” that may include: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Pathological lying swindling and slandering; alcoholism and drug addiction; sexual offences, and violent actions with little motivation and an entire absence of self-restraint, which may go as far as homicide.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The problem with psychopathy as a concept is that it is rather circular. Barbara Wootton, a prominent critic of the term, <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Social_science_and_social_pathology.html?id=cvoYAAAAIAAJ">lays it out</a> very clearly: psychopaths are “the model of the circular process by which mental abnormality is inferred from anti-social behaviour, while anti-social behaviour is explained by abnormality”.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/120030/original/image-20160425-22364-1vielqn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Jake Gyllenhaal in Demolition.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.foxpressofficeuk.com/films/demolition/images/">Twentieth Century Fox Press Office</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The key word in all of this is “social”. Social responsibility and anti-social behaviour. Davis is repeatedly confronted with his father-in-law, the straight-laced, emotionally repressed Phil (Chris Cooper). However much Phil tries to hold in his emotions, he appears on the verge of breaking down. Davis on the other hand, appears completely disengaged. He remarks on the atmosphere of the bar they’re in, right in the middle of Phil’s emotional confession of his pain. This sets up the key contrast: Phil is repressed, while Davis appears to be unable to respond emotionally at all.</p>
<h2>A puzzling twist</h2>
<p>But then my theory is destroyed. Davis begins to connect with a customer service operator named Karen (Naomi Watts), at the vending machine company that owes him the M&amp;Ms. He meets and also connects with her son Chris (Judah Lewis), who is struggling with his sexuality. This part of the film is arguably shot with the most self-conscious symbolism in all of cinema history: Davis smashes up his house with a sledgehammer (in case the audience doesn’t get it he actually refers to this work as “destroying my marriage”). He reconnects with the world, through Karen and Chris. He uncovers emotions when he discovers an unsettling revelation about his late wife.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oijxltsBYGA?wmode=transparent&amp;start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
</figure>
<p>So in the end it isn’t about psychopathy. It’s about shock, or grief, or delayed emotional reactions. Because then all the emotions do come out, and he makes up with his late wife’s family, and funds a carousel for children with special needs in her memory.</p>
<p>There is still something interesting here, despite the saccharine resolution. It’s about <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model">having the “right” emotions</a>, in the right contexts, and how difficult this can be. Even in the aftermath of a life-changing event, where all the old certainties have been upended, we must tread a fine line. Grief is fine, but not too much, and not for too long. But not too little either, and don’t be flippant. Emotions and emotional expression come easily for some. What some people feel fits into lots of the right boxes for the particular time and place. But what if you are unable to process your experience in those socially-sanctioned ways?</p>
<p>But I still have doubts. It is implied at points that Davis has never really had the right emotions his whole adult life. Admittedly, he might just be projecting that affective flatness back from his “in-shock” state. But then again, maybe he is empathy free and emotionless and he’s just learned to fake it a little better. Who buys a carousel for emotional closure? Clearly somebody with no idea about human emotional response.</p>
<p>But here are the questions that the film could have explored, but didn’t: how do we deal with people whose emotional responses we don’t understand? Are they ill? Are they bad? Instead, Davis resolves the questions and everything is fine. But we all have points at which our behaviour, or emotional response, or both doesn’t match what others expect. Who gets to decide those expectations, or the consequences when these things don’t match up?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/55894/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Chris Millard receives funding from the Medical Humanities division of the Wellcome Trust. </span></em></p>How do we deal with people whose emotional responses we don’t understand? Demolition does not have the answers.Chris Millard, Wellcome Trust Medical Humanities Research Fellow, Queen Mary University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/512822016-01-26T10:43:01Z2016-01-26T10:43:01ZNot all psychopaths are criminals – some psychopathic traits are actually linked to success<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/106575/original/image-20151217-8104-bkgazi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Some psychopathic traits can lead to success, at least in the short term.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-298318184/stock-photo-man-in-suit-on-a-black-background.html?src=Ca6ymdbXqzZJ1p0Y5IR5iA-1-3">Man in suit via www.shutterstock.com.</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Tom Skeyhill was an acclaimed Australian war hero, known as “the blind solider-poet.” During the monumental World War I battle of Gallipoli, he was a flag signaler, among the most dangerous of all positions. After being blinded when a bomb shell detonated at his feet, he was transferred out.</p>
<p>After the war he penned a popular book of poetry about his combat experience. He toured Australia and the United States, reciting his poetry to rapt audiences. President Theodore Roosevelt appeared on stage with him and said, “I am prouder to be on the stage with Tom Skeyhill than with any other man I know.” His blindness suddenly disappeared following a medical procedure in America. </p>
<p>But, according to biographer Jeff Brownrigg, Skeyhill <a href="http://www.anchorbooksaustralia.com.au/Anzac%20Cove.html">wasn’t what he seemed</a>. The poet had, in fact, faked his blindness to escape danger. </p>
<p>That’s not all. After a drunken performance, he blamed his slurred speech on an unverifiable war injury. He claimed to have met Lenin and Mussolini (there is no evidence that he did), and spoke of his extensive battle experience at Gallipoli, when he had been there for only eight days. </p>
<p>You have to be pretty bold to spin those kinds of self-aggrandizing lies and to carry it off as long as Skeyhill did. Although he never received a formal psychological examination (at least to our knowledge), we suspect that most contemporary researchers would have little trouble recognizing him as a classic case of psychopathic personality, or psychopathy.</p>
<p>What’s more, Skeyhill embodied many elements of a controversial condition sometimes called successful psychopathy. </p>
<p>Despite the popular perception, most psychopaths aren’t coldblooded or psychotic killers. Many of them live successfully among the rest of us, using their personality traits to get what they want in life, often at the expense of others.</p>
<h2>All psychopaths are criminals if you look for them only behind bars</h2>
<p>Psychopathy is not easily defined, but most psychologists view it as a personality disorder characterized by superficial charm conjoined with profound dishonesty, callousness, guiltlessness and poor impulse control. According to some estimates, psychopathy is found in <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/03/is-wall-street-full-of-psychopaths/254944/*">about one percent of the general population</a>, and for reasons that are poorly understood, most psychopaths are male. </p>
<p>That number probably doesn’t capture the full number of people with some degree of psychopathy. Data suggest that psychopathic traits lie on a continuum, so some individuals possess marked psychopathic traits but don’t fulfill the criteria for full-blown psychopathy. </p>
<p>Not surprisingly, psychopathic individuals are more likely than other people to commit crimes. They almost always understand that their actions are morally wrong – it just doesn’t bother them. Contrary to popular belief, only a minority are violent. </p>
<p>Because researchers tend to seek out psychopaths where they can locate them in plentiful numbers, much research on the condition has taken place in prisons and jails. That’s why until fairly recently, the lion’s share of theory and research on psychopathy focused on decidedly unsuccessful individuals – such as convicted criminals. </p>
<p>But a lot of people on the psychopathic continuum aren’t in jail or prison. In fact, some individuals may be able to use psychopathic traits, like boldness, to achieve professional success.</p>
<h2>A profoundly disturbed core</h2>
<p>The very existence of successful psychopathy has been controversial, perhaps in part because many scholars insist they have never seen it. Some say the concept is illogical, with others going so far as to term it <a href="http://www.scholarpedia.org/article/Psychopathy">an oxymoron</a>. </p>
<p>Successful psychopathy is a controversial idea, but it’s not a new one. In 1941, American psychiatrist Hervey Cleckley was among the first to highlight this paradoxical condition in his classic book “<a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1941-02603-000">The Mask of Sanity</a>.” According to Cleckley, the psychopath is a hybrid creature, donning an engaging veil of normalcy that conceals an emotionally impoverished and profoundly disturbed core. </p>
<p>In Cleckley’s eyes, psychopaths are charming, self-centered, dishonest, guiltless and callous people who lead aimless lives devoid of deep interpersonal attachments. But Cleckley also alluded to the possibility that some psychopathic individuals are successful interpersonally and occupationally, at least in the short term.</p>
<p>In a <a href="http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/fedpro10&amp;div=51&amp;g_sent=1&amp;collection=journals">1946 article</a>, he wrote that the typical psychopath will have often:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>outstripped 20 rival salesmen over a period of 6 months, or married the most desirable girl in town, or, in a first venture into politics, got himself elected into the state legislature. </p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Charming, aggressive and looking out for number one</h2>
<p>In 1977, Catherine Widom published <a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.45.4.674">a study</a> about “noninstitutionalized psychopaths.” To find these individuals, she placed an advertisement in underground Boston newspapers calling for “charming, aggressive, carefree people who are impulsively irresponsible but are good at handling people and looking out for number one.” </p>
<p>The individuals she recruited exhibited a personality profile similar to those of incarcerated psychopaths, and about two-thirds of them had been arrested. </p>
<p>What’s the difference between the psychopaths who get arrested and the ones who don’t? Research from Adrian Raine, now at the University of Pennsylvania, conducted in the 1990s sheds some light. </p>
<p>Raine and his colleagues <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/abn/110/3/423/">recruited men from temporary employment agencies</a> in the Los Angeles area. After first identifying those who met the criteria for psychopathy, they compared the 13 participants who had been convicted of one or more crimes with the 26 who had not. Raine provisionally regarded these 26 men as successful psychopaths. </p>
<p>Each man gave a videotaped speech about his personal flaws. Raine and his colleagues found that the men they considered successful psychopaths displayed significantly greater heart rate increases, suggesting an increase in social anxiety. These men also performed better on a task requiring them to modulate their impulses. </p>
<p>The bottom line: having a modicum of social anxiety and impulse control may explain why some psychopathic people manage to stay out of trouble.</p>
<h2>The psychopath at the stock exchange</h2>
<p>More recently, <a href="http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/24/4/298.short">some researchers</a>, ourselves included, have speculated that people with pronounced psychopathic traits may be found disproportionately in certain professional niches, such as politics, business, law enforcement, firefighting, special operations military services and high-risk sports. Most of those with psychopathic traits probably aren’t classic “psychopaths,” but nonetheless exhibit many features of the condition.</p>
<p>Perhaps their social poise, charisma, audacity, adventurousness and emotional resilience lends them a performance edge over the rest of us when it comes to high-stakes settings. As Canadian psychologist Robert Hare, the world’s premier psychopathy expert, <a href="http://www.fastcompany.com/53247/your-boss-psychopath">quipped</a>, “If I weren’t studying psychopaths in prison, I’d do it at the stock exchange.” </p>
<p>Our lab at Emory University, and that of our collaborators at Florida State University, are investigating whether some psychopathic traits, such as boldness, predispose to certain successful behaviors.</p>
<p>What do we mean by boldness? It encompasses poise and charm, physical risk-taking and emotional resilience, and it is a trait that is well-represented in many widely used psychopathy measures. </p>
<p>For instance, in studies on <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092656613000822">college students</a> and people in the <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4106400/">general community</a>, we have found that <a href="http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode/psychopathys-bright-side-kevin-dutt-12-12-28/">boldness is modestly</a> tied to impulsive heroic behaviors, such as intervening in emergencies. It’s also linked to a higher likelihood of assuming leadership and management positions, and to certain professions, such as law enforcement, firefighting and dangerous sports. </p>
<h2>Want to be president? Having some psychopathic traits could help</h2>
<p>There’s one job in particular in which boldness may make a difference: president of the United States.</p>
<p>In a study of the 42 American presidents up to and including George W. Bush, we asked biographers and other experts to complete a detailed set of personality items – including items assessing boldness – about the president of their expertise. Then, we connected these data with independent surveys of presidential performance by prominent historians.</p>
<p>We found that boldness was positively, although modestly, associated with better overall presidential performance. And several specific facets of such performance, such as crisis management, agenda setting and public persuasiveness, were associated with boldness too. This may be something to keep in mind the next time you see presidential candidates talk about how bold they’ll be in the White House.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/107591/original/image-20160107-14016-go56yy.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=1000&amp;fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/107591/original/image-20160107-14016-go56yy.gif?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=237&amp;fit=clip"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Theodore Roosevelt, the boldest of them all.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/530950">National Archives and Records Administration</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In an interesting coincidence, the boldest president in our study was the one who said he was proud to share a stage with Tom Skeyhill. Theodore Roosevelt was <a href="http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/T/bo21386470.html">described</a> by a recent biographer as possessing a “robust, forceful, naturalistic, bombastic, teeth-clapping, animal-skinning, keen-eyed, avalanche-like persona.” </p>
<p>The boldest presidents were not necessarily extreme or pathological on this dimension, but boldness was markedly elevated relative to the average person. </p>
<p>Although boldness was tied to some successful actions, we generally found that other psychopathic features, such as callousness and poor impulse control, were unrelated or negatively related to professional success.</p>
<p>Boldness may be associated with certain positive life outcomes, but full-fledged psychopathy generally is not.</p>
<h2>Where’s the line between success and criminality?</h2>
<p>Could psychopathic traits be adaptive? Few investigators have explored this “Goldilocks” hypothesis. Moreover, we know surprisingly little about how psychopathic traits forecast real-world behavior over extended stretches of time. </p>
<p>The charm of the psychopath is shallow and superficial. With that in mind, we would argue that boldness and allied traits may be linked to successful behaviors in the short term, but that their effectiveness almost always fizzles out in the long term. After all, Tom Skeyhill was able to fool people for only so long.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/51282/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Despite the popular perception, most psychopaths aren't coldblooded or psychotic killers. Many live successfully among us, using their personality traits to get what they want.Scott O. Lilienfeld, Professor of Psychology, Emory UniversityAshley Watts, Ph.D. Candidate, Emory UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/450472015-07-28T02:32:06Z2015-07-28T02:32:06ZPsychopaths versus sociopaths: what is the difference?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89862/original/image-20150728-7665-1sqj5jg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=496&amp;fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Television serial killer Dexter may be more of a psychopath than a sociopath due to his methodically delivered kills.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/pimkie_fotos/3484952865/in/photolist-6iXi5e-4jnui6-9b23AN-7QkLPc-6zeRjJ-9hx2Fa-6HrvLn-7sEQhy-qx8Juu-xA7Yk-7jQUms-7nQdZH-53uZoW-WziUP-dk4uiq-7UneFq-5r6Wzn-5r6W5F-GCr1C-ouSZjv-5r6Wdn-oUyotj-8WGR72-7xLpGf-xAzWK-dk4uzE-8UVdJT-8KCA3H-7nPxUM-9xsSwv-dk4sTB-7vuJif-5r6Wn8-8pWDFi-57Cu3f-6XZhsS-nbZTbj-7aGRzr-5F71sQ-rX1Ufb-GhzY4-pb1iLa-8UheFG-5uZdtm-8uVwGg-5r6WoM-5rbhmo-8uVwAZ-5r6VZa-b1U74i">Pimkie/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Psychopath and sociopath are popular psychology terms to describe violent monsters born of our worst nightmares. Think Hannibal Lecter in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102926/?ref_=nv_sr_1">Silence of the Lambs (1991)</a>, Norman Bates in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0054215/">Psycho (1960)</a> and Annie Wilkes in <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100157/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Misery (1990)</a>. In making these characters famous, popular culture has also burned the words used to describe them into our collective consciousness. </p>
<p>Most of us, fortunately, will never meet a Hannibal Lecter, but psychopaths and sociopaths certainly do exist. And they hide among us. Sometimes as the most successful people in society because they’re often ruthless, callous and superficially charming, while having little or no regard for the feelings or needs of others.</p>
<p>These are known as “successful” psychopaths, as they have a tendency to perform premeditated crimes with calculated risk. Or they may manipulate someone else into breaking the law, while keeping themselves safely at a distance. They’re master manipulators of other peoples’ feelings, but are unable to experience emotions themselves.</p>
<p>Sound like someone you know? Well, heads up. You do know one; at least one. <a href="http://dsm.psychiatryonline.org/doi/book/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596">Prevalence rates</a> come in somewhere between 0.2% and 3.3% of the population. </p>
<p>If you’re worried about yourself, you can <a href="http://vistriai.com/psychopathtest/">take a quiz to find out</a>, but before you click on that link let me save you some time: you’re not a psychopath or sociopath. If you were, you probably wouldn’t be interested in taking that personality test. </p>
<p>You just wouldn’t be that self-aware or concerned about your character flaws. That’s why both psychopathy and sociopathy are known as anti-social personality disorders, which are long-term mental health conditions.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/89865/original/image-20150728-7665-7t46is.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&amp;q=45&amp;auto=format&amp;w=754&amp;fit=clip">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Although most of us will never meet someone like Hannibal Lecter from Silence of the Lambs, we all know at least one sociopath.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">from shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What’s the difference?</h2>
<p>Psychopaths and sociopaths share a number of characteristics, including a lack of remorse or empathy for others, a lack of guilt or ability to take responsibility for their actions, a disregard for laws or social conventions, and an inclination to violence. A core feature of both is a deceitful and manipulative nature. But how can we tell them apart?</p>
<p>Sociopaths are normally less emotionally stable and highly impulsive – their behaviour tends to be more erratic than psychopaths. When committing crimes – either violent or non-violent – sociopaths will act more on compulsion. And they will lack patience, giving in much more easily to impulsiveness and lacking detailed planning.</p>
<p>Psychopaths, on the other hand, will plan their crimes down to the smallest detail, taking calculated risks to avoid detection. The smart ones will leave few clues that may lead to being caught. Psychopaths don’t get carried away in the moment and make fewer mistakes as a result.</p>
<p>Both act on a continuum of behaviours, and many psychologists still debate whether the two should be differentiated at all. But for those who do differentiate between the two, one thing is largely agreed upon: psychiatrists use the term psychopathy to illustrate that the cause of the anti-social personality disorder is hereditary. Sociopathy describes behaviours that are the result of a brain injury, or abuse and/or neglect in childhood.</p>
<p>Psychopaths are born and sociopaths are made. In essence, their difference reflects the nature versus nurture debate. </p>
<p>There’s a particularly interesting link between serial killers and psychopaths or sociopaths – although, of course, not all psychopaths and sociopaths become serial killers. And not all serial killers are psychopaths or sociopaths.</p>
<p>But <a href="https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder/serial-murder-1#four">America’s Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)</a> has noted certain traits shared between known serial killers and these anti-social personality disorders. These include predatory behaviour (for instance, <a href="http://www.biography.com/people/ivan-milat-17169710">Ivan Milat</a>, who hunted and murdered his seven victims); sensation-seeking (think hedonistic killers who murder for excitement or arousal, such as <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-24/thomas-hemming-sentenced-over-melbourne-double-murder/5839568">21-year-old Thomas Hemming</a> who, in 2014, murdered two people just to know what it felt like to kill); lack of remorse; impulsivity; and the need for control or power over others (such as <a href="http://www.biography.com/people/dennis-rader-241487">Dennis Rader</a>, an American serial killer who murdered ten people between 1974 and 1991, and became known as the “BTK (bind, torture, kill) killer”).</p>
<h2>A case study</h2>
<p>The Sydney murder of Morgan Huxley by 22-year-old Jack Kelsall, who arguably shows all the hallmarks of a psychopath, highlights the differences between psychopaths and sociopaths.</p>
<p>In 2013, Kelsall followed Huxley home where he indecently assaulted the 31-year-old before stabbing him 28 times. Kelsall showed no remorse for his crime, which was extremely violent and pre-meditated. </p>
<p>There’s no doubt in my mind he’s psychopathic rather than sociopathic because although the murder was frenzied, Kelsall showed patience and planning. He had followed potential victims before and had <a href="http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-stories/2015/03/18/-worthless-psychopath--guilty-of-murder.html">shared fantasies he had about murdering a stranger</a> with a knife with his psychiatrist a year before he killed Huxley, allegedly for “<a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/daniel-jack-kelsall-found-guilty-of-morgan-huxleys-murder-indecent-assault/story-fni0cx12-1227267704006">the thrill of it</a>”.</p>
<p>Whatever Kelsall’s motive, regardless of whether his dysfunction was born or made, the case stands as an example of the worst possible outcome of an anti-social personality disorder: senseless violence perpetrated against a random victim for self-gratification. Throughout his trial and sentencing, Kelsall showed no sign of remorse, no guilt, and gave no apology.</p>
<p>A textbook psychopath, he would, I believe, have gone on to kill again. In my opinion – and that of the police who arrested him – Kelsall was a serial killer in the making.</p>
<p>In the end, does the distinction between a psychopath and sociopath matter? They can both be dangerous and even deadly, the worst wreaking havoc with people’s lives. Or they can spend their life among people who are none the wiser for it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45047/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Xanthe Mallett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Psychopaths and sociopaths have similar characteristics, lacking remorse or empathy for others. And they can both be violent, deceitful and manipulative. But what are the differences between the two?Xanthe Mallett, Senior Lecturer in Forensic Criminology, University of New EnglandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.